Evidence Hub

Optimization of Current Procedural Terminology Coding in Complex Genitourinary Surgical Specimens

Behrman DB, Achram R, McClure C, Allen BE, Miller C, Shoffeitt CJ, Magliocca KR, Steward-Tharp SM et al.

Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine, 2025

33 participants

Abstract

CONTEXT.—: Complex surgical specimens are associated with complex Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding.

OBJECTIVE.—: To assess and optimize the accuracy of CPT coding of complex genitourinary specimens at our institution.

DESIGN.—: Baseline CPT codes for nephrectomy and cystectomy surgical pathology specimens were examined during a 3-month period. Pathology reports were reviewed for accurate CPT coding, and commensurate tests of change were implemented. Post-test-of-change data were re-collected, analyzed, and compared to the baseline data.

RESULTS.—: Baseline data consisted of 71 genitourinary specimens (April to June 2021) and demonstrated undercoding in 46% (n = 33 of 71) of specimens, mostly in specimens with 2 or more billable organs. From findings in baseline data, we implemented test-of-change efforts consisting of awareness, education, and increased documentation and communication between all involved parties. Marked improvement was noted in the coding accuracy of specimens with 2 billable organs (pretest: n = 4 of 21, 19%; posttest: n = 14 of 21, 67%) and 3 or more billable organs (pretest: n = 0 of 16, 0%; posttest: n = 7 of 12, 58%) (P value = .002). Problematic areas included nephrectomy specimens resected with adrenal glands (pretest: n = 2 of 12, 17%; posttest: n = 12 of 14, 86%) and ureters for urothelial carcinoma (pretest: n = 0 of 10, 0%; posttest: n = 3 of 6, 50%), as well as regional lymph nodes commingled with resection specimens (pretest: n = 0…

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free